Desmond Bishop: Facing Rodgers part of motivation for joining Vikes

Now that he’s officially a member of the Vikings, linebacker Desmond Bishop will face his former teammates from Green Bay at least twice during the 2013 season.

During an appearance on the NFL Network Tuesday, Bishop said that was part of the reason why he decided to make the move from Wisconsin to Minnesota. He’s looking forward to a matchup with one member of the Packers offense in particular.

“It was part of the reason,” Bishop said. “And if I can get a chance to play against Aaron Rodgers, I think that right there, in itself, is a motivation. You know, you want to play against the best.”

It also can’t hurt that the Packers decided to jettison Bishop in favor of other inside linebackers and without much discussion of a reworked contract that would have made more financial sense for the team.

Bishop also said that he isn’t concerned about making the move from a 3-4 scheme to the Vikings’ 4-3 look, where he’s expected to play middle linebacker with Erin Henderson moving back to the weak-side of the base defense. Bishop is confident he can play any position “with success” and that belief will certainly be put to the test when the Vikings and Packers square off in their eternal battle for control of the NFC North.

I knew it. Ego and pride are his “motivating factors,” ………like he had a choice. Wouldn’t you want to stick it to somebody that rejected you? Who doesn’t? But just because you want to doesn’t mean it automatically happens. This guy will be lucky to make the team. I think he’s nothing more than training camp fodder. He was good once though…..like 1,000 other guys before him.

Viking haters, can hate…as they usually do since we have the BEST RB since barry sanders. if I was a fan of a different team, id be a little jealous too. Bishop just made this Defense stronger. and the paqueer fans aint classy enough to admit it.

Rogers not even in the top half !
What a statement.
I would say he is in the top 3 if not THE best but to say he is not the 16th best in the league…I guess that shows what the Super Bowl less Vikings fans know

The juvenility of so many of the Packer fans is remarkable. I don’t see this from fans of any other NFL team, to this extent. So your team cut a player, and another team picked him up – why is that such an emotionally difficult concept? This happens with every team in the NFL. One might think that Packer fans have an inflated sense of entitlement – that can’t be right, can it?

I speak for all Viking fans when I say that Aaron Rodgers is one of the best, if not THE best, QB in the game today. Anyone who says otherwise does not watch football. Don’t judge us all based on one moronic post.

Can a Vikings fan tell me how they expect to catch the Packers by signing players past their prime and can’t stay on the field? Signing an aging player takes a roster spot away from a young developing player. This is a young man’s game and the teams that stay on top adhere to the draft and develop philosophy. Signing free agents isn’t how you win.

That injury was pretty severe. He didn’t just tear the hamstring, he tore the tendon connecting it to the bone. If he’s recovered – it was a good pickup, and even I’ll admit that Ted screwed up.

I’m just doubting that to be the case – Thompson doesn’t give up good players unless they want too much money, and he didn’t even offer Bishop ANYTHING. Just look at how long he held onto Johnny Jolly because he had potential?

Can a Vikings fan tell me how they expect to catch the Packers by signing players past their prime and can’t stay on the field? Signing an aging player takes a roster spot away from a young developing player. This is a young man’s game and the teams that stay on top adhere to the draft and develop philosophy. Signing free agents isn’t how you win.
_____

Bishop is 28. For most players, that’s considered the prime of their career. To Packer fans, that’s considered time to retire. The best teams draft and develop, but they also fill specific holes by signing established veterans to low-risk contracts.

@Rick Spielman is a Magician, do you think that if he was just entering the prime of his career that Ted Thompson would just cut him. If he was ready to be a LB in his prime he would have gotten a better offer than he did. Sorry but you picked up damaged goods.

You know have picked up two players that couldn’t stay on the field last year. That isn’t who you fill holes.

Can a Vikings fan tell me how they expect to catch the Packers by signing players past their prime and can’t stay on the field? Signing an aging player takes a roster spot away from a young developing player. This is a young man’s game and the teams that stay on top adhere to the draft and develop philosophy. Signing free agents isn’t how you win.
_____

Bishop is 28. For most players, that’s considered the prime of their career. To Packer fans, that’s considered time to retire. The best teams draft and develop, but they also fill specific holes by signing established veterans to low-risk contracts.

————

I was going to point out that the Vikings contract with Greg Jennings is anything but “low risk.”

Then I realized you said “the *best* teams,” which–of course– doesn’t apply to the Vikings.

@Rick Spielman is a Magician, do you think that if he was just entering the prime of his career that Ted Thompson would just cut him. If he was ready to be a LB in his prime he would have gotten a better offer than he did. Sorry but you picked up damaged goods.

You know have picked up two players that couldn’t stay on the field last year. That isn’t who you fill holes.
____

Well, I don’t think 28 is “aging.” I also don’t have the same respect for Ted Thompson that you do. I think it is possible that he cut a serviceable linebacker who is capable of being a one-year fill-in for us. And if he can’t stay healthy, that’s the breaks. Each team took a risk, but I’d rather be the team taking very little risk and getting the player.

I was going to point out that the Vikings contract with Greg Jennings is anything but “low risk.”
____

The best teams also occasionally give a big contract to a player that can make a significant impact. Of course, the Packers would never do that because they just draft and develop. Remember when they drafted Reggie White and Charles Woodson? How’d that Cedric Benson draft pick work out for you?

purplepride74 says:
Jun 25, 2013 10:55 AM
I’m not sure why Packer fans are worried, it’s not like Bishop has been able to learn Rodgers’s tendencies by practicing against him and playing with him these past 6 years. Oh wait….

————–

The dreaded Henry Burris tactic. That always works well.

Cobb and Finley have perma-boners thinking of Erin Henderson and Bishop in coverage. I think a wheel barrow full of bricks would be as efficient.

As a life long Packer fan I’ve gotta say it won’t surprise me if we’re screaming at Ted for letting Bishop go. Brad Jones is not the answer. PERIOD. Just watch game tape and you’ll see. His running game instincts are poor and while he makes some tackles in pass defense he is constant chasing. Neither starting ILB on this team has an ounce of nasty in them, the one skill Bishop was superior and this current squad is severely lacking.

I have no ill will for signing with the Vikings. Hell, I’m a competitive guy and if my former team said get bent I’d surely be looking to shove it up their a$$ anytime possible.

DID you just say this??
Chris Cook would start in GB, if not be their #1.
SO dumb…….we’ll see what happens this year. All I know is Bishop just made the defense a little bit better.

—————————————————

LMAO. Chris Cook would be our dime back, at best. Tramon, Shields, and Hayward are all better. Nice try, though.

As for Bishop, he was a very solid player, but only 50% of players with his type of injury end up being able to play more than one game the following year. I don’t think people fully realize how serious the injury is and how great the re-aggravation risk is.

I was going to point out that the Vikings contract with Greg Jennings is anything but “low risk.”
____

The best teams also occasionally give a big contract to a player that can make a significant impact. Of course, the Packers would never do that because they just draft and develop. Remember when they drafted Reggie White and Charles Woodson? How’d that Cedric Benson draft pick work out for you?

—–

Wait, you said Rodgers is a one man team. Jennings can’t make a significant impact if he required Aaron Rodgers to be good.

gpack22 says:
Jun 25, 2013 12:51 PM
As a life long Packer fan I’ve gotta say it won’t surprise me if we’re screaming at Ted for letting Bishop go. Brad Jones is not the answer. PERIOD. Just watch game tape and you’ll see. His running game instincts are poor and while he makes some tackles in pass defense he is constant chasing. Neither starting ILB on this team has an ounce of nasty in them, the one skill Bishop was superior and this current squad is severely lacking.

I have no ill will for signing with the Vikings. Hell, I’m a competitive guy and if my former team said get bent I’d surely be looking to shove it up their a$$ anytime possible

————-

I love these kinds of posts. Jones is one part of subpackages. The whole point of “draft and develop” is the fact that players actually, you know, develop. Add in they really like Terrell Manning who has the full compliment of skills, drafted two more LBs (it’s that whole “draft” thing) and continue to develop guys like Dezman Moses and Perry and a guy with an exploded leg becomes expendable.

That’s what it actually means to “draft and develop”. Not just mutter it in a press conference like super GM Spielman and then go out and blow a bunch of picks on a “potential” WR, a punter and sign busted up players.

As a Packer fan, I have to assume that they think Bishop’s injury remains problematic, otherwise, I think he had the potential to really help the Packers in an area where they could really use more depth. We’ll see. If he’s healthy, seems like a good pickup for the Vikings.

“Can a Vikings fan tell me how they expect to catch the Packers by signing players past their prime and can’t stay on the field? Signing an aging player takes a roster spot away from a young developing player. This is a young man’s game and the teams that stay on top adhere to the draft and develop philosophy. Signing free agents isn’t how you win.”

Can you, or any other Packer fan, explain to me how bringing Johnny Jolly (already 30) who hasn’t even had a uniform on in over 3 years, is worthy of taking a roster spot away from a young developing player?

Jennings is 29 and Bishop 28 – both younger than Jolly and both have been productive in the NFL since 2009 when Jolly decided it was more important to drink cough syrup than play football.

It is a young man’s game. Last year the average age of both the Packers and Vikings rosters was 27.1.

For this season – the projected average age for starters in the NFL has the Packers with the 27th oldest starters in the NFL – only the Bills, Seahawks, Chiefs, Rams and Browns look to have an older group of starters.

I was surprised that they let him go, but I think the Packers got tired of waiting on guys that got injured. Bishop filled in behind Barnett the year they won the Superbowl, then he became starter. He missed 3 games in 2011, and all of 2012.

I think the packers let him go based on the injury history. He is a good player when healthy, but he will probably be a bit of a liability in pass coverage.

“Can you, or any other Packer fan, explain to me how bringing Johnny Jolly (already 30) who hasn’t even had a uniform on in over 3 years, is worthy of taking a roster spot away from a young developing player?”

He’s not. Jolly is popular on the team, and they like Jolly as a person and are trying to help get his life straight. He won’t make the team at the expense of one of their young guys.

Wow, you guys must really enjoy jawing at each other. So, the Vikes signed Bishop? Big deal. Obviously, Thompson thinks Bishop can’t play because of the injury. Spielman thinks he can so he gave him a 1-year veteran-minimum contract with some incentives. Given that all we have at MLB is Erin “I can do this, I can do this” Henderson, it seems like a low risk, low $$$ signing at position of significant need. If he can’t play (and he probably can’t, from what I hear regarding the injury), they’re out less than $1M. This is the team that gave $7.4M to Benard Berrian to not catch passes in his first year and $16M to Brett Farve to be terrible. $1M is chump change. It’s a fine signing.

The real truth is the packers cant pay Bishop the 1.35 million and the
Vikings did..In the end it was the money. Rodgers took every dime the packers had now they cant afford to keep good players. Bishop wont be the last good football player the packers lose this season

As a life long Packer fan I’ve gotta say it won’t surprise me if we’re screaming at Ted for letting Bishop go. Brad Jones is not the answer. PERIOD. Just watch game tape and you’ll see. His running game instincts are poor and while he makes some tackles in pass defense he is constant chasing. Neither starting ILB on this team has an ounce of nasty in them, the one skill Bishop was superior and this current squad is severely lacking.

I have no ill will for signing with the Vikings. Hell, I’m a competitive guy and if my former team said get bent I’d surely be looking to shove it up their a$$ anytime possible.
———————————————————-

wow, a reasonable packer fan DOES exist. kudos gpack22 for showing us that you can have an informed football discussion with a GB fan

what the trolls can’t get through their thick heads is, we didn’t sign Bishop to be the savior at LB. We picked up a decent player on a very low risk deal to provide depth at a position of need. If he turns out healthy and can play at his prior level, the Vikes got a good deal. if he can’t stay healthy or has lost his edge, he’s only on a 1 year deal so they are out very little if he doesn’t pan out.

Us trolls understand the vikings paid 2x as much as any other offer.The Packers cut him because of the injury, the misnomer is because of the cap. If I am not mistaken the Packers have the least dead money along with more money than most to spend. Being that he was only given a 1yr contract supports that. I just hope you are around when Bishop goes down or isn’t even able to participate fully.

I wish Bishop the best, and really wish the Packers would have kept him. People say “oh 3 LB with starter money”, but the Pack has had a ton of problems with injuries at that position over the past few years and they don’t have any depth there now.

However, the injury he had is a rare one, and one that doesn’t have the best prognosis. About 50% of the players that have it don’t play in another game. So for the Packers there was quite a bit of risk given his salary.

For what the Vikings paid, it’s a good gamble. They are not on the hook long term, and there are some guys that have played 3 or more years after the injury.

Like I said at the start…somebody will grab him up for the minimum because if he were worth more the Packers wouldn’t have let him go.Hopefully he can take the field against the Pack so Rodgers can further exploit the Vikings.

The idea that Bishop has some sort of edge on Rodgers because they practiced against each other goes both ways. Same with Jennings.

Any possible edge will come from the fact that the Vikings now know both the Packers offense and defense, yet im betting they still won’t be able to beat them.

Both guys were good signings for the Vikings, if they can stay healthy both could end up being pro bowlers. I can see why Viking fans would be giddy, not only do you gain 2 good players if healthy, GB your most hated rival loses 2 good players all in one fell swoop.

The only caveat is GB played without both for most of last season anyway so they already know what life is like without them.

As a Packer fan I vow to never play the SuperBowl card on this site against Viking fans. It is becoming more than tiresome. Past accomplishments are wonderful for the fanbase and should be collectively appreciated, but I can’t enjoy holding a three year old Super Bowl victory over anybody’s head, much less ten and thirty year old trophies. Current accomplishments should certainly provide the winning team and their fans with bragging rights, but enough already. If you’re the champ, go ahead and yell it out. It should last until the next champ is crowned….and then let it go. The actions of some Packer fans on this site make me wonder why the Giants fans aren’t stuffing their four -year record against the Packers down Packer fan throats. They could. Maybe they should.

Please understand……there are fringe-dwelling malcontents rabidly following every team, Packers and Vikings included. I vow to ignore them both. They don’t represent me or the fans I hang out with.

May the best team win in 2013. Good luck to both. (No offense to the Bears and Lions!)